Bad for shareholders of course, but also bad in terms of...

Bad for shareholders of course, but also bad in terms of corporate ethics.

Am I wrong in recalling that very recently we were told that if the huge amount of money they were seeking was not raised, the directors would continue to run the business as before?

Sure, we were told that growth potential was limited and that this was the main reason for wanting to do the deal that would dilute existing shareholders so badly... but was there any mention of MXL being so badly stressed that they would have to put it into voluntary administration?

I do not recall any such piece of (you would think) moderately important information being shared with the market.

Is it or is it not encumbent on directors to keep the market informed so that trading can be conducted with some knowledge of the company's position? How many of us would have taken the opportunity to at least take something off the table if we were told that if the multi millions required wasn't raised that MXL would be put into administration by its own directors?

I don't know whether this spells the immediate end of ESN or not, but I am pretty disgusted that millions of shares in ESN have changed hands while only SOME priveleged people were aware that the highly ambitious raising HAD TO SUCCEED for MXL to avoid immediate administration.

Disgraceful, in my opinion. Of course ASIC couldn't give a fat rat's clacker about this kind of thing happening at minnow level. It's time we started to see angry small company shareholder rallies outside ASIC headquarters when this kind of thing goes unchecked. The Australian regulatory authorities are a joke and our market is just as much a cowboy bourse as Vancouver or any of the other legalised scams that masquerade as sharemarkets around the globe.

Okay, I've let off some steam. Anyone with anything optimistic to contribute? Am I being too harsh?